Taking into account that we tested it against another 3G phone with a T-Mobile SIM in it, we believe that it's not a network factor, it's the G1's browser and processor being able to render pages much faster. So if you're looking for a fast Web experience on the go, we strongly recommend checking out the T-Mobile G1.

That justifies the conclusion faster than the Omnia. But I see no indication that the iPhone was on the T-Mobile network. iPhones in the US are tied to AT&T/Cingular; what network are they tied to in the UK?

Gah! I read it again and what they actually did was run a T-Mobile Samsung Omnia against the T-Mobile G1 on silicon.com and barackobama.com. The G1 wins...
And then they run the (O2-locked) iPhone against the T-Mobile G1 on eHam.net, and the G1 wins.

Great for the G1 and all... but seriously? CNET, you fail at comparisons. Different sites? For the love of the experimental method, why?

And there's absolutely no way to conclude that the G1's processor or browser beats the iPhone's on this test alone... maybe O2 just really, really sucks? Who knows?

If you really want to do a comparison... just unlock the damned thing and put in SIM cards from the same network!

because the ability to get a page fast over a low bandwidth connection is important to most perspective buyers (ability to deal with compressed pages, pipelining etc) and at the end of the day if you live in the UK you will get iphones & G1s on their respective connections.

Why? Until the average man on the street is able to use his iPhone 3G on another network, give me one reason it ISN'T a valid real world comparison. You're not going to be using your iPhone on T-mobile's network, you'll be using it on O2. End experience and perception. "Oh, it's not my iPhone, it's the network!"? Seems reasonable to me.

The first time I saw an iPhone in person was in rural Virginia. It wasn't fast, but it actually worked out there. T-Mobile doesn't even really have any service out there, so I guess it really is just a moot point for a lot of people.

The iphones browser does have speed issues, probably down to the processor. It seem to pause for a few seconds whilst loading pages, so for example I can bring up the bbc.co.uk page in under a second on this network in firefox, on the iphone over the same wifi it takes 15 seconds - I can't believe the data rate of the iphone is that poor (I expect it can't do a full 54g but I'm only on a 10meg connection anyway) so that leaves the processor.

In the states, T-Mobile has almost no 3G coverage outside of several major cities. And data coverage itself, which is often sparse west of the Mississippi, all but disappears when one gets to the middle United states.

All reports indicates that Google has built a very good smart phone OS. Now that it is open sourced we are likely to see a great number of smart phones of varying quality, some which will be very fast and put the propriety guys to shame on certain benchmarks, and with features the propriet

But I actually called AT&T and talked to the apple rep and BEGGED for an option to turn off 3G, it's beyond a joke. I'd rather have EDGE only, the 3G is so bad it actually causes my phone to take 3 or 4 times as long as my 1st gen EDGE iPhone to load a web page. Thats because the signal is next to worthless in podunk areas like DOWNTOWN FREAKIN SF and I have to wait for the phone to decide... "ohhh... this take too long... me switch to edge and retry"

I've been with T-Mobile since they were Voice Stream back in 2000 when I was living in Dallas. In Dallas they were great, but I've been in NYC since early 2005 and their service sucks in this area. Most of the time my Internet access doesn't work at all.

My room mate, a senior T-Mobile Engineer, did a test just last night of his new G1 on T-Mo's 3G network versus his iPhone on AT&T's network and saw a full 150kbps difference between the two, with advantage going to the G1. On a later test they ran the G1 against the iPhone with both on T-Mobile's network and saw between a 50 - 75kbps difference between the two, again, advantage G1.

So far I'm rather impressed with the device. The trackball is very functional, easy to use, and seems well made. The device is fast and responsive, and while the screen may not be quit as big or pretty as the iPhone's, it's still plenty nice enough. Ok, it doesn't have multi-touch (as far as I can ascertain), but it's fast, very functional and I really really want one now. Web-browsing was a wonderful experience (first time I can say that about a phone), and did I say it was fast? Also the native console and SSH functionality was awesome, and I was very surprised by how well it represented my SSH sessions, including irssi - I must have one.

It really does look better in the hand than it does on photos. Ok, not quite as slick as the iPhone, but I'm also not one of those people who will shell out an extra $X just to get a pretty PC case when all I want is functionality - I don't need my mobile device to be sexy in an artistic way, I want it to be sexy in a functional, useful and powerful way. The teenage emo girls on 4chan can have the iPhone, it's G1 for me.

Don't forget open standards for the phone too, and the fact that with the time and effort you can make it do anything you want to, and not have to be beholden to what Apple thinks you should be able to do, or a glorified pager that is the Blackberry.

Almost everybody here is comparing phones on different networks. The only way you can say anything useful about the phones is if they're using the SAME NETWORK.

"3G" is not a bandwidth value. Neither is "Edge". For both of these, data transfer rate depends mainly on how far you are from the cell company's antenna, and how many walls and trees are between you and it.

Unless those factors are identical for both phones, your comparison says nothing about the speed of the phones, and nothing useful about how the phones will behave for someone else. The only person here who's made a sensible comparison is dnwq, who said

If you really want to do a comparison... just unlock the damned thing and put in SIM cards from the same network!

Turns out it's an O2 network issue:
From TA:
"Update: A previously published version of this article concluded that the G1's browser and processor were able to render pages faster than the iPhone's. In response to reader comments regarding a Wi-Fi test, we have now run a set of tests and concluded that, indeed, both phones load pages at a similar speed over Wi-Fi. This means there's little difference in processor or browser performance. Clearly the G1 is a superior Web phone to the Omnia, but it seems to be O2's network that is holding the iPhone back."

I've tested the same web-site on wired & 3G tmobile connection, & tmobile reduces the (byte) size of all image files on the fly in their transparent proxy. Might improve performance a tad! A proper test would use https as this cannot be interfered with in this way.

Other than the lightsaber app, that's pretty standard on most high-end phones. I pay a lot less for my Nokia N95 8GB, and on features alone it beats the iPhone. Naturally, it can't compete on interface, but it's not as bad as people tend to report. In some ways I prefer the interface even - buttons have their advantages.

Other than the lightsaber app, that's pretty standard on most high-end phones. I pay a lot less for my Nokia N95 8GB, and on features alone it beats the iPhone.

My primary phone these days is a Nokia E70 [wikipedia.org]. Nice phone overall and I like it. The features are roughly identical to my wife's iPhone 3G - but only if you are just doing a checkbox feature comparison. Technically it has the "same" stuff but not all of it is usable. In actual usability there is a pretty wide gap for most people. Why? The interface.

The interface on Nokia's S60 [wikipedia.org] phones just sucks in comparison. Yes, a geek like me (and presumably you) can make it work just fine but ONLY a geek like me would bother. Getting an iPhone configured is a breeze by comparison - not to mention using it. It took me hours of navigating obscure menus to get my E70 working "properly" and I've had a series of Nokia phones for 10 years so I'm plenty familiar with their interface. The physical keyboard is nice but the iPhones virtual one works adequately. Particularly galling were:

the poorly considered default options

the need for special headphone adapters to use the MP3 player

the need for special Nokia specific cables

the lack of attention to the interface in many of the applications including the MP3 player and the camera

By comparison, setting up my wife's iPhone took 30 minutes and I had never held one before hers. Is the iPhone perfect? Heck no, but I've spent quality time with plenty of S60, Blackberries and Treos and for 9/10 people I'd recommend the iPhone over any of them if they have a choice. It's just less hassle. Fortunately it seems to have gotten the handset manufacturers off their rear ends so we are seeing a nice wave of innovative new phones coming out.

Ever hear of Windows Mobile or S60? ALL of that was available well before the iPhone was ever announced (except lightsaber, but who really cares?). It's really nothing special, just more idiot-proof and much less flexible.

It's really nothing special, just more idiot-proof and much less flexible.

Flexibility in a mobile device is a two edged sword. It might give you capabilities but the designer isn't careful the cost is usually a degradation in usability. I have an S60 based phone and my wife has the iPhone 3G. I'm a geek with plenty of technical skill and if given the choice today I'd take the iPhone over my Nokia without a second thought. It's just easier to use for the stuff I actually use a smartphone for. All that "flexibility" bites Nokia in the ass when it comes time to actually use the

No, I mean it's resources/capabilities should be a lot better.
Well, you're not really paying for resources and capabilities with an Apple product.
Apple has become a design-oriented company. They try to make sure everything looks and feels consistent. They make things as intuitive as possible, even if that means sacrificing some functionality. They don't add unusable junk to their products just so they can have the largest feature count. They spend real money on good industrial designers who make prod

I would be tempted to say that about most Apple products. They do have some good ones, and they have some overpriced hyped ones that really aren't that amazing... although, with some (like the iPhone) there wasn't much competition for a while.

I remember when the iPod first came out its competition was (IMO) pretty worthless.

Apple seems to be a good innovator, but they are (again, IMO) not able to compete with the products that imitate them. A lot of Apple's competitors release decent products inspired by Apple's products, but in a (much) lower price range.

I will be moderated troll/flamebait as always in this kind of threads but I don't care.

So, could you tell me which ones are the good non-overpriced ones?

Imho:

Nano - non-good.Classic - non-good.Touch - somewhat good, but there are better and more price worthy players out there.iPhone - insane price.Mac mini - are you kidding?Macbook - somewhat good but over-priced.Macbook Pro - Good but really over-priced.iMac - Good and decent price at release for 24" ones, only product worth it's price if you're not an

I don't have mod points, but I wouldn't mod this as troll because it isn't one. It's your opinion. Opinions are nice. Thank you for yours.

Incidentally, the $400 that I spent on an iPhone a year ago after the first price drop was almost exactly the same as I spent on a Treo 650 a year previously. Smartphones are more expensive than regular phones. That's the way it is.

Why can't the offer competitive products instead of cripple them on purpose to make insane amount of money from the people actually buying the stuff anyway?

I ran a hack earlier instead of this real one and since the hacks seems to be even easier to use by the time and not stop working my next machine will likely be a hack. Or FreeBSD + KDE but I'd like a couple of pro apps to.

Also I really doubt the Sony NWZ-series interface is harder to work with than iPhone, haven't seen much about the AppleTV so can't comment, most people seem to be able to use Windows just fine, iPhone IS cool but it cost 3-4 times to much including the subscription for me and the G1 is much more open so I wouldn't care for it anyway.

I like capable gadgets with options, not limited ones which force feed me their decisions and ways of doing things.

I don't hate macs, I hate the limited amount of options and the high prices (in europe/sweden at least.)

I'd take better graphics and panels over faster cpus and exotic memory options. Cheaper prices would be nice to, and closer service (no Apple stores here) but I can understand that the market is to small for the later / that it's mostly an american company and the software makes up for some of the extra cost.

I'd take Cowon D2, O2, Sandisk Sansa Fuze and Sony NWZ-series over iPod though, and a much cheaper

In terms of hardware capabilities I agree. But the iPhone is a really great design, which the G1 has not matched. The trackball, moving screen, tilted bottom piece, lack of standard 1/8th" audio jack of the G1 are awkward in the end. I would like to see something with the simplicity of the iPhone with an open architecture and cutting edge hardware. Disclaimer, i realize that there are drawbacks to the iPhone design, battery service comes to mind, but that is a sacrifice I would make due to the elegance

I've had a G1 for about a week and I don't think your comments make much sense.

The trackball is very convenient, it gives you mouse-like control over the screen. On the G1 and the iPhone, the touchscreen is good but it's no replacement for a mouse. The iPhone would be better with a trackball. The moving screen is handy, because there are so many good apps for Android already, you'll run out of room. The titled bottom piece causes absolutely no issues whatsoever. The only complaint I'd give credit to is the audio jack thing. They should have included a regular 3.5mm jack.

I've used both the G1 and the iPhone and I like the G1 a lot more so far.

It has a nice smooth interface, in the same ballpark as the iPhone. It has an easy to use app store, which is nicer than Apple's because it already has apps that you'd have to jailbreak the iPhone for. It uses standard mechanisms for thinks like uploading music, etc. Instead of locking you into their stupid iTunes product. As a developer, you get to develop on any platform you want and the dev kit is free.

So, honestly, the iPhone is a decent product, but it's been bested by Android already IMO. It will be interesting to see just how awesome Android becomes on future products.

I agree that I would like a 3.5" jack but at the same time I also understand why there isn't one. This is sort of the elegance in design AshtangiMan likes in the iPhone. Everything is done through a single port on the G1 rather than having to place multiple ports on it. If you want to use earphones other than the ones provided or plug it into your car stereo you can get an adapter fairly inexpensively.

I know that's not a perfect solution but then what is? It is six of one (single port with adapters) or half a dozen of the other (multiple ports).

I have an iPhone myself (first gen), and it I wouldn't say it's all marketing. It is an excellent phone by the virtue that it is enjoyable to use, as opposed to other phones which feel clunky and, well, unusable. It does excel at its core functionality and wraps it up in a beautiful interface. However, I do feel Apple's role in the market isn't as a market leader, but as an innovator. The iPhone really helped point cell phone developers where the phone market should be heading. That being said, I think

Still by the time it's got a keyboard, a touch screen, some buttons and a trackball... it feels like it's perhaps over doing it.

Do you think it's ugly in person? Like my last HTC device, it's much nicer in your hand than in pictures.

The integration between the phone and third party apps is wonderful.

When a call comes in that isn't in my phone book, the whitepages app does a reverse number lookup and shows that on screen.

I can use shazam to identify music and then go straight to youtube or the amazon mp3 store to buy or listen to it.

I can scan the barcode of a book, compare the prices at online stores and it'll tell me which local booksellers have it and give me driving directions to the store (although it only seems to work for b&n)

The music comes from wherever you are - watching TV, on a bus, sitting next to some guy in his car who is playing his stereo too loudly, whatever. Shazam identifies music in your environment that you record. Pretty neat, really.

Sure is. I have it on my iphone and have identified a couple of new (to me) bands that I'm very fond of that would have taken me forever to identify any other way. It's definitely one of the apps I don't want to be without, ever again.

In the UK you can call 2580 for Shazam on any mobile phone. I've only ever called in nightclubs, so all I've ever done is wait until the call ends -- I don't know if they give instructions or something. The call ends after 30 seconds or so, and a few seconds after that you receive a text with the name of the song.

It does it with the Camera and it's not great. It's fine if you've got a second or two to hold it steady and let the image focus, but it's nowhere even close to the performance of a proper barcode scanner.

I've done a lot of work for a manufacturing facility on the.Net compact framework and Symbols MC3900 platform. It's been absolutely rock solid and a dream to work with. The devices aren't cheap, but I'm impressed by them

that would purchase them based upon that in and of itself (they use barcode on the manufacturing floor, and have to replace barcode scanners all the time due to shitty equipment / shitty employees sitting on them / losing them).

Apps written expressly for the iphone run faster than the java apps on the G1.

Where's your benchmark to prove it? The truth is Java runs "on hardware" in most mobile devices. There's a chip which translates the Java opcodes to native ARM intructions without any delay or slowdown whatsoever. Naturally nothing less could be expected on a device so strained for power and speed.

In the first place, Android apps are not Java apps. They are compiled to a different byte-code and run on a different VM, which is Android-specific.

Yours is the typical VM FUD. If it's a VM, it MUST be slower, right guys? Please. Look what native code has gotten the iPhone: no multi-tasking for custom apps, no garbage collection, developers saddled to an antiquated language (ObjectiveC). These things can be worked around, and there are lots of great iPhone apps, but native-code is not

You do realize that they're both based on WebKit, right? The same core rendering engine? The dramatic differences between Chrome and Safari are the shell (Chrome really scores here on Windows) and the JavaScript engine. Neither are likely to be relevant on the mobile platform.

Back to the desktop: sure V8 is faster than the engine used by Safari 3.1, but if you're comparing products that aren't yet complete you might want to look at a Safari nightly build. The SquirrelFish Extreme engine is even faster t

They're both based on WebKit, but there are some huge differences between the two WebKit branches. They have different JavaScript implementations, and they have completely different code in the platform-dependent layer. This layer is responsible for, among other things, network connections, URL parsing / handling, text glyph loading, and drawing.

A lot of apps just ask for access in terms of "internet access" which doesn't care whether it is 3G, EDGE, or WiFi. So, you don't have to have a data plan. It even works on just the $5.99 unlimited plan according to some people.
However, I think I get my value worth in NYC. All I need left is tethering...

Google HQ is right next to Moffett Federal Airfield, which used to be an active military base. It is now used by NASA Ames, which is a giant research facility. Earlier this year Google announced a joint venture with NASA and are leasing space inside the AMES research facility. The founders also pay a lot to have their private commercial jet to be housed there. I find it interesting that the 7th Psychological Operation Group is also stationed at Moffett Field.